This team needs to tank

[McC]

(03-14-2019, 04:38 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Brilliant coaching and a non inept organization. Something the Bengals have neither of. 

The book is out on Taylor, but the chips are stacked against him. 

The most easily ignored fact of all.  Hasn't even had a single OTA or practice or anything, yet people are convinced they know what he'll do, how much say he has in anything and even what he is thinking at any given time.  That's not a farce at all. 

I guess it's safe to assume this message board band of future seers and mind readers is a bunch of billionaires living on private islands with supermodels posting here out of sheer boredom.

Besides, the Browns have already won the SB, so why even bother?

[WeezyBengal]

(03-14-2019, 04:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No it does not.

There are teams that eventually get better after being losers for a long time, but that does not mean losing made then better.

But if you want to argue the point then tell me how much losing is needed to make a winner?  Bengals once went 14 years without a winning record.  How much did losing 13 games in 1991 contribute to us finally having a winning season in '05?

The Bengals being awful and going 2-14 and drafting Carson Palmer with the first pick in 2003 had 100% to do with their 2005 winning season. 

Next... 

[*PhilHos*]

(03-14-2019, 04:52 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Acquiring talent makes you better. The Bengals are PASSIVE in acquiring the best talent that they can in free agency every year. It's nothing new...that's how they have approached free agency as far back as I can remember. 

To sit here and say that acquiring good players in free agency (or big names as you like to call them) doesn't make your team better is completely asinine. 

The Rams used free agency to sign quality guys to supplement an already quality team...like many winning teams do in the NFL. They added pieces to their puzzle. The Bengals added Bobby Hart and Preston Brown. You tell me how this ends up... 

I didn't realize free agency was over.

[Gamma Ray Tan]

(03-14-2019, 04:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Is this a statement or a request?

Did you accidently leave out a word or two?

Could you please use enough proper syntax for me to understand what you are trying to say?

Do you equate smart with cheap? ....apologies

[WeezyBengal]

(03-14-2019, 04:55 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I didn't realize free agency was over.

It's not over. The Bengals have some mediocre talent lined up to visit. John Miller and Brian Poole. Whoever the hell those guys are. Havent you heard? 

[*PhilHos*]

(03-14-2019, 04:53 PM)Gamma Ray Tan Wrote: Would he HELP them win the Super Bowl? That is the question. I’ve been arguing “ to my utter surprise “ that in general, getting Better players (in this case free agency) would make the Bengals a better team. I believe that successful teams generally have the better players on them. Seems simple right? Evidently NOT! It has been contested that getting a few better “more expensive” players in free agency would not help this team win....even though the Bengals have never even tried that philosophy, it is being shot down as ludicrous by some. Ok, so if I ask you who would you rather have at QB Mahomes or Dalton....most would say, probably, Mahomes .... I would, but why?..is it because he’s BETTER? of course! We always choose to have the better player on our team, but to argue that getting mediocre talent every year in free agency and by some miracle expect them to turn into Pro Bowlers......argggh! Just sign the Pro Bowler.....it’s just easier. You don’t have to sign every big name free agent, but to sit back and tell us Bobby Hart (not to pile on....just an example) will be  awesome this year and no one in free agency was better....really a mute point I guess....this team is in rebuilding mode.

I don't know what you have against paragraphs, but I haven't seen anyone say that getting better players would not help this team. Granted, I haven't read through this whole thing, but if you could show me where people saying not getting better players is a good thing, I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

[XenoMorph]

(03-14-2019, 05:00 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: It's not over. The Bengals have some mediocre talent lined up to visit. John Miller and Brian Poole. Whoever the hell those guys are. Havent you heard? 

just cause you don't know their name yet doesn't mean they are a bad player... there is 53 guys on each team (1696 players) every year plus all the injury replacements.    How many of those names do you know?

[*PhilHos*]

(03-14-2019, 05:00 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: It's not over. The Bengals have some mediocre talent lined up to visit. John Miller and Brian Poole. Whoever the hell those guys are. Havent you heard? 

Maybe you should wait until it's clear the Bengals are done adding players via free agency before you claim the Bengals haven't done anything in free agency.

Just a thought.

[McC]

(03-14-2019, 05:02 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: just cause you don't know their name yet doesn't mean they are a bad player... there is 53 guys on each team (1696 players) every year plus all the injury replacements.    How many of those names do you know?

Seems like I remember something like Bobby Who?

Bobby Williams, that's who.

[fredtoast]

(03-14-2019, 04:55 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: The Bengals being awful and going 2-14 and drafting Carson Palmer with the first pick in 2003 had 100% to do with their 2005 winning season. 

Next... 

So your answer is that it takes 12 years of losing to create winning?


Next...

[fredtoast]

(03-14-2019, 04:52 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: To sit here and say that acquiring good players in free agency (or big names as you like to call them) doesn't make your team better is completely asinine. 

Not if you pay any attention to reality.

Just last year alone....Vikings add Cousins (3 yr $84 mill) and Sheldon Richardson (1 yr $8 mill) and dropped from 13 wins to 8.  Cards add Keenum (1 yr $20 mill) and drop from 8 wins to 3.  Giants add Nate Solder (4 yr $62 mill) and win only 5 games.  Titans add Malcolm Butler (5 yr $61 mill) and miss playoffs after going in '17.

I can go on and on and on and on with multiple examples from ever year if you want.

I can't believe how many people claim to be NFL fans and still claim that no top dollar free agent ever busts or that every team that signs the most expensive free agents gets better.  


They need to google "Dan Snyder"

[fredtoast]

(03-14-2019, 04:56 PM)Gamma Ray Tan Wrote: Do you equate smart with cheap? ....apologies

Yes if you get better value for the money spent.

In 2011 the Bengals improved their defense from 24th to 9th mainly because they signed three new starters in free agency (Thomas Howard, Manny Lawson, Nate Clements).  None of them were big first day signings.

Instead of blowing all their money on one big name player they signed three.  They got better value for their money so they were "smart".

[Gamma Ray Tan]

(03-14-2019, 05:19 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Not if you pay any attention to reality.

Just last year alone....Vikings add Cousins (3 yr $84 mill) and Sheldon Richardson (1 yr $8 mill) and dropped from 13 wins to 8.  Cards add Keenum (1 yr $20 mill) and drop from 8 wins to 3.  Giants add Nate Solder (4 yr $62 mill) and win only 5 games.  Titans add Malcolm Butler (5 yr $61 mill) and miss playoffs after going in '17.

I can go on and on and on and on with multiple examples from ever year if you want.

I can't believe how many people claim to be NFL fans and still claim that no top dollar free agent ever busts or that every team that signs the most expensive free agents gets better.  Ever heard of Dan Snyder.

Why are you so against the Bengals going after a “big name” free agent? You’ve admitted it can work, so why not try it....ONCE. It could work just as much as not......so why are you so against it? Seriously?

[Gamma Ray Tan]

(03-14-2019, 05:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes if you get better value for the money spent.

In 2011 the Bengals improved their defense from 24th to 9th mainly because they signed three new starters in free agency (Thomas Howard, Manny Lawson, Nate Clements).  None of them were big first day signings.

Instead of blowing all their money on one big name player they signed three.  They got better value for their money so they were "smart".

And how many playoff wins did we get? Not being a jerk, just think we look at things differently. Look what one impact player (Khalil Mack) did for the Bears.

[fredtoast]

(03-14-2019, 05:26 PM)Gamma Ray Tan Wrote: Why are you so against the Bengals going after a “big name” free agent? You’ve admitted it can work, so why not try it....ONCE. It could work just as much as not......so why are you so against it? Seriously?

Because if it does not work out the contract can hurt the team for years.

EVERY team in the league pays to keep their best players.  So there is always some reason why a player hits free agency.  You claim the Bengals have NEVER signed a top dollar free agent but they have actually done that many times (Palmer, Chad, TJ, Willie Anderson, Levi Jones, Whitworth, Green, Dalton, etc, etc).  That is where a team should spend the most free agent money.

I have also said many times that when a team has a roster that is close to competing for a championship they need to step up and take more chances on a free agent or two.  But even then I am wary of spending the huge money on players that other teams have decided to let go instead of paying.

[sandwedge]

(03-14-2019, 05:04 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Maybe you should wait until it's clear the Bengals are done adding players via free agency before you claim the Bengals haven't done anything in free agency.

Just a thought.

Oh no that won't work. We gotta spend 20-25 mil on a player. That's how we know they are good.....

[fredtoast]

(03-14-2019, 05:30 PM)Gamma Ray Tan Wrote: And how many playoff wins did we get? Not being a jerk, just think we look at things differently. Look what one impact player (Khalil Mack) did for the Bears.

We definitely look at things differently if you think the Bears won a playoff game with Khalil Mack.

[sandwedge]

(03-14-2019, 05:32 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Because if it does not work out the contract can hurt the team for years.

EVERY team in the league pays to keep their best players.  So there is always some reason why a player hits free agency.  You claim the Bengals have NEVER signed a top dollar free agent but they have actually done that many times (Palmer, Chad, TJ, Willie Anderson, Levi Jones, Whitworth, Green, Dalton, etc, etc).  That is where a team should spend the most free agent money.

I have also said many times that when a team has a roster that is close to competing for a championship they need to step up and take more chances on a free agent or two.  But even then I am wary of spending the huge money on players that other teams have decided to let go instead of paying.

Drop the mic Fred!!!  Fred has left the building!!

[sandwedge]

(03-14-2019, 05:30 PM)Gamma Ray Tan Wrote: And how many playoff wins did we get? Not being a jerk, just think we look at things differently. Look what one impact player (Khalil Mack) did for the Bears.

Did I miss a 3rd team in SB? Patriots, Rams and Bears? I know you said playoff, but how'd that workout?

[Gamma Ray Tan]

(03-14-2019, 05:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: We definitely look at things differently if you think the Bears won a playoff game with Khalil Mack.

5-11 (10th Def) to 12-4 (3rd Def). Mack made a huge difference.